About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the deficit, everybody knows the problem with the deficit. who do we think is more likely to deal with the deficit? someone who has run it up over a trillion dollars every year he has been in office? is that too is going to do it to? or do we think governor romney, a businessman who is committed to fiscal responsibility is going to do it? who is going to do it to? if the barack obama is in the white house four years from now, he will have appointed one half of all federal judges and he will have changed the complexion of the added states supreme court for decades. can we stand that in this country? is that what we want to? no. foreign affairs. the president of the united states went to new york today, yesterday. other presidents have gone to meet with world leaders to sit down with the israelis and other allies, people who he needs to understand. and interesting article this morning about his failure to do that. he went to new york not to meet with world leaders, he is on "the view." [booing] what a sense of priorities. he said after our ambassador was killed, after we look at the
is telling france hey, you got to get that budget deficit under control, big budget deficit is verboten the socialist president of france, francois hollande, tax the rich, not so rich, capital gains, profits, you name it, there will be a big new tax. on upper end of income every dollar over a certain level the french government will take 75 cents. rip it right out of your hand. 75 cents on the dollar. more than $200,000, they take 45 cents on the dollar, almost half. bill, this is a massive gamble because france's economy is dead flat, teetering on recession. 10-year high for unemployment and france puts in place huge tax increases. bill: i'm reading the two measures bringing around half a billion euros. >> that's it. >> what will that do for them? >> not much. there are other taxes as well which will bring in a total they think of 20 billion euros. bill: higher tax rates on dividends? >> dividends, capital gains, dividends, profits, reinvestment of capital, interest you name it. bill: here is a query for you. are they cutting spending at all? >> by about $10 billion euros. $20 billion
is liberal to cut spending? i think is liberal to cut taxes when you are operating a deficit, because you are spending money. >> i do not think your labels mean a lot. what i have said from the beginning -- the centerpiece of our problems is the national debt. we simply have to look at this. whether we do it this year because of the way our economy is or next year, a two-door 0.3 trillion -- 2.3 doris trillion -- >> i want you to respond to this. >> i'm glad there is a clear contrast between the two of us. i do not believe we should raise taxes. i do not think the problem is that americans are not taxed enough. mr. sadler has been very candid that he would consider raising taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax is. >> that is not fair. >> if you would consider allowing all of the bush tax cuts to expire, that would raise taxes on every single tax and who pays income tax. are the texans to pay income taxes we would not raise taxes on? you did not have an answer. >> you will not put words in my mouth. i would say, the first place, we have to balance the budget, cut spending, and
, there is a commitment. we can get away from the deficit. this hurt those people who had committed most to us in the sense that, what is going on here? here is this guy who was a arrested with illegal weapons. what was he doing? this hurt the trust. we just uncovered -- recovered from that when we have the osama bin laden raid. i am convinced, as most people will look at the evidence are convinced, that the top leadership, military, intelligence, and civilians, did not know osama bin laden was in abbottabad. all of us were exhausted from staying up a whole night. it was a punch drunk meeting. the first thing they said was congratulations. they realize someone who they were against and wanted to see gone was gone. it was only a few days after that that they realize that the political price the military was paying that that became manifest, when public american commentators said you are either implicit or incompetent, it happen to be true. it put them very much on the spot. the response by those pakistanis who had committed to working with us, who had --mitted to the post in the summer of 20001
to national security. back then in 1988, democrats were in the middle of a 30-year, 35-point deficit when it came to voter trust on national security. that security gap began in the aftermath of the vietnam war and persisted very stubbornly until about 2008 when it closed up due mostly to republican mistakes. voters were tired of the iraq war, tired of the kind of blundering that they had perceived in the bush administration and decided that both parties, there was kind of a pox on both houses. what's been very interesting -- and third way has been partnering with our own polling and focus groups for the last seven years -- is that if you look at this slide, that's the security gap. if you extend it out to the left, it gets wide and absolutely consistent going all the way back to about 1972. but you could see where it closed up in '07-08 because of the iraq war, and now it's closed up again. and the interesting thing about that is it's at zero now because we have a president who has had an enormously successful first term when it comes to national security. when we did focus groups on thi
spending, debt, deficits and make this much more of an idealogical argument, an idealogical case against the president. he is a big government liberal. he expanded government at every turn. he will expand government further in his second term. gregg: want to put one more graphic poll up for you. most voters, 73%, say they're aware of the 47% comment notoriously made by governor mitt romney. but look at this, 63% think he is right when he argues that too many people in america are dependent on the government. you have to add two numbers together. mostly true, 36%. somewhat true, 27%. might that actually help him instead of what the pundits and democrats predicted which was it was was going to hurt him? >> it's hard to say. there is other polling show the 47% comments have hurt him. i think the problem was mitt romney kind of tripped in that argument. he made an argument that had problems with it. there were inaccuracies in the specific charges he was making but i think it is indisputable his broader case is true. i think that is showing up in the polling numbers you just showed. no questi
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)